What tricks do you use to avoid repetition?

[Torinona]

Sometimes if I know I'm going to write a story where there will be a lot of dialogue, I print out a sort of thesaurus page of words like "reply, intone, respond" so as not to keep writing "he said/she said."

Pete_L, one of the wonderful volunteer editors here, told me I used "And" and "But" entirely too much to start sentences, so I have a Post-It that I stick to my screen to help me avoid that trap.

Any other tricks, tips or exercises you use to keep your writing fresh and with as little repetition as possible.

Thanks in advance!

 

[lovecraft68]

Welcome to the AH

I have a piece of paper taped to my desk labeled "words to avoid" which are the ones that you can usually do without, but in my case I was really carried away with early on.

They are (and I stress these are for me, I'm not setting any rules for anyone)

Actually

Almost

Even (as in "I even tried taking...."

That-many times if you read a sentence with that you will also find it will work without it just as well.

And- the usual I had too many 40-50 word sentences that could have been made into shorter ones, by ditching and.

I mean/of course. I used to start way too many first person narratives with Of course. and way too much dialogue with "I mean, think about it..."

Those are some of mine.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

SAID is OK for moderate runs of dialog, otherwise I salt it with replied or suggested or wondered.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Sometimes if I know I'm going to write a story where there will be a lot of dialogue, I print out a sort of thesaurus page of words like "reply, intone, respond" so as not to keep writing "he said/she said."

Pete_L, one of the wonderful volunteer editors here, told me I used "And" and "But" entirely too much to start sentences, so I have a Post-It that I stick to my screen to help me avoid that trap.

Any other tricks, tips or exercises you use to keep your writing fresh and with as little repetition as possible.

Thanks in advance!

I avoid repetition with dialog tags by using as few as possible. After the first "said," I can go up to an entire page without using another tag. It gets more difficult when there are more than two people speaking. In those circumstances I sprinkle in alternates, such as "asked," "responded," and "interrupted" to name a few. I try to get away without tags in multi person conversations by having characters direct statements to one another when possible. E.g.:

"Joe, where have you been?" Dana asked.

"I was at the club."

"Did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, you could take a minute and call your wife?"

"Leave him alone, Dana, I'm sure his cell phone battery was dead," Celia said. "Again."

My biggest issue is the word "and." I seem to think that every sentence needs two verbs, two nouns, and two complete actions. At least that's better than in my professional writing, where I have a habit of making every sentence a list of three items. I'm working on that one by just adding more periods and making fewer compound sentences. Like that one.

 

[jehoram]

"Joe, where have you been?" Dana asked.

"I was at the club."

"Did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, you could take a minute and call your wife?"

"Leave him alone, Dana, I'm sure his cell phone battery was dead," Celia said. "Again."

To my ear, that last line might be better if recast:

"Leave him alone, Dana," Celia said. "I'm sure his cell phone battery was dead. Again."

That give the reader a little more time to realize that it isn't Joe, but Celia, who is speaking.

Dialogue is tricky stuff. When I was first editing another writer's work, I found that she hated to use the word "said" and used every synonym in the thesaurus to avoid it. The result was distracting at times, and I had to persuade her that "said" is a perfectly acceptable word. I don't have to re-write her dialog as much as I used to do.

Another very bad habit is using adverbs to modify "said." Intelligently and sparingly used, it works, but overuse leads to the kind of writing that marked the old "Tom Swift" children's books. (For more on that, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Swifty)

One way to avoid the repetitive use of "said" is to make the dialog of the characters so distinctive that the reader has little trouble distinguishing who is talking:

"I say, my good sir, that your language is most unbecoming to the present company!"

"Aw, guvner, I warn't meanin' no harm! "

"Nonetheless, I must insist that you apologize to the lady at once!"

"I'm apologizin' then. Sorry, Mum! Pardon my French. If I'd known the likes of you was so sensitive, I'd of talked more genteel. Just a bloody fool, I am."

But as the above example demonstrates more painfully than I'd like, you need a good ear for dialog to pull it off.

 

[johneb87]

In my first chapter of New Life, I was accused of using "John" too many times.

John tried to sit up when he felt an incredible sharp pain in his left side. He laid back down on the ground and placed his hand on his left torso. John could feel the wetness of the blood that had soaked through his shirt and could tell that he still was bleeding. He painfully rolled onto his stomach and pushed himself to his knees. As he looked down, he noticed his M4 rifle was on the ground next to him. John also realized he still had all of his gear on. John figured that if he still hurt like hell and still had his weapon, he was still alive.

LOL, then again, it was my very first story. But since then, I try to make a conscious effort to only use a character name no more than once or twice per paragraph. Instead, I try to make sure to use more "he," "she," or descriptions such as "the young soldier," or "the dragoness."

 

[Tx Tall Tales]

I read my stories out loud. You'll catch everything that sounds wrong, repetition, echoing, awkward phrasing.

I learned this with a writing group. I could edit something 10 times, and as soon as I had to read it out loud in front of a group, I was marking things up left and right.

I started practicing reading out loud, to know when I would hit my time limit, and the number of issues I found was mind boggling.

If you haven't tried this trick, I suggest you give it a go.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

I read my stories out loud. You'll catch everything that sounds wrong, repetition, echoing, awkward phrasing.

I learned this with a writing group. I could edit something 10 times, and as soon as I had to read it out loud in front of a group, I was marking things up left and right.

I started practicing reading out loud, to know when I would hit my time limit, and the number of issues I found was mind boggling.

If you haven't tried this trick, I suggest you give it a go.

This is good too, especially when working on dialogue.

 

[Ironiclaconic]

Hitting the thesaurus to avoid "said" can cause its own problems. The primary purpose of tags is to help the reader keep track of who is speaking, and are best implemented in a way that avoids calling attention to them. The best way to do that is to mix it up.

"Why?" Mary asked.

"I felt like it." John made sure his tone dripped with enough apathy to piss her off.

"You only think of yourself," she said.

"I learned that from you."

"So that's what this is about?" Mary poked her accusation into John's sternum. "One torrid affair and I am a selfish bitch for the rest of my life?"

"It was more than a torrid affair," John said. "It was a one night stand with the entire New York Jets' offensive line. The Jets, Mary -- not the Giants -- the fucking JETS!"

 

[TE999]

I avoid 'he said, she said' whenever possible. It's boring and repetitious.

I like to establish who's speaking and let the reader follow along, to wit:

"I really like kinky sex," Mary laughed.

"It kinda scares me," Sally replied.

"I'm not into the heavy stuff, just some light bondage and spanking."

"I do like being spanked when I'm being fucked from behind."

"Hah! You do like it kinky, you devil."

"Ummm, yeah, I guess I do."

 

[Bramblethorn]

"So that's what this is about?" Mary poked her accusation into John's sternum.

Having trouble visualising how anybody can be poked in the sternum with an accusation, unless she's had time to print it out and roll it up into a baton. Maybe "Mary poked John in the sternum accusingly", although I'd be tempted to drop "accusingly" altogether; the physical gesture already conveys the mood.

 

[_Lynn_]

Having trouble visualising how anybody can be poked in the sternum with an accusation, unless she's had time to print it out and roll it up into a baton. Maybe "Mary poked John in the sternum accusingly", although I'd be tempted to drop "accusingly" altogether; the physical gesture already conveys the mood.

This is from something I worked on earlier today, although it's still in the rough first draft form. I debated how to write it for the best emphasis and stopped at this for now.

“I do not take money from strangers,” she hissed, punctuating each word with a stab of her finger to his chest.

 

[Ironiclaconic]

Having trouble visualising how anybody can be poked in the sternum with an accusation, unless she's had time to print it out and roll it up into a baton. Maybe "Mary poked John in the sternum accusingly", although I'd be tempted to drop "accusingly" altogether; the physical gesture already conveys the mood.

I am having trouble visualizing how someone can "convey a mood". Do they carry it on their back? If they drop it does it break?

Or are you merely very selective in your pedantry?

And to avoid confusion in other works of English, one doesn't literally "hurl" an accusation either, nor does one literally "level" an accusation. Words in English are often used metaphorically to convey (not literally convey) parallel (not literally parallel) meanings in an original way. Glad we could clear that up.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I am having trouble visualizing how someone can "convey a mood". Do they carry it on their back? If they drop it does it break?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/convey?s=t

con·vey [kuhn-vey]
verb (used with object)
1. to carry, bring, or take from one place to another; transport; bear.
2. to communicate; impart; make known: to convey a wish.
...

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

 

[Ironiclaconic]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/convey?s=t



Seems pretty straightforward to me.

And how do you think that second definition came about, by coincidence or by metaphoric use of the first definition? If you prefer staler imagery like "hurling accusations" that is your preference, but don't pretend metaphoric word use is new to you.

 

[Bramblethorn]

(wrote my previous response before IL's edit came through, so...)

And to avoid confusion in other works of English, one doesn't literally "hurl" an accusation either, nor does one literally "level" an accusation.

Actually, yes, one does.

One of the accepted meanings of the word "hurl" is "to utter with vehemence". So if you utter an accusation with vehemence, you are indeed literally hurling an accusation; you're strictly adhering to one of the accepted meanings of "hurl". Similarly, "level" has an accepted meaning "to aim a weapon, criticism, etc., at a mark or objective."

I get the impression you're using "literally" to mean something along the lines of "physically" or "tangibly" here, but that is not what "literally" means.

Words in English are often used metaphorically to convey (not literally convey) parallel (not literally parallel) meanings in an original way.

...and again, both of those are in fact literal usages, because the dictionary lists an accepted meaning that exactly matches how you're using them. You are very likely correct in thinking that those particular usages originated as metaphors based on the physical meanings of the same word. But they've long since entered the language and established themselves as common, recognised use.

With that out of the way: as it happens, I wouldn't have objected to a sentence along the lines of "Mary poked John with accusations". I'm not sure whether it quite fits a dictionary definition of "poke", so maybe it's not a literal usage, but at the very least it seems like a reasonable metaphor that's not likely to confuse the reader.

The problem here isn't that you're using "poked" in a non-physical sense. It's that you're putting it in a context which makes it both physical and non-physical at the same time. "Poked... into John's sternum" implies a physical poking, but "poked her accusation" implies non-physical. Combining the two means the reader has to stop and try to work out what you meant, which is almost always a bad thing. (The exception would be if you're deliberately aiming for absurdity.)

 

[sr71plt]

Having trouble visualising how anybody can be poked in the sternum with an accusation, unless she's had time to print it out and roll it up into a baton. Maybe "Mary poked John in the sternum accusingly", although I'd be tempted to drop "accusingly" altogether; the physical gesture already conveys the mood.

Sorry, Bramblethorn, I think you are being too literal minded here. I liked the phrasing of "Mary poked her accusation into John's sternum." More interesting than the literal version, I thought.

And in ML's example, I would find "each word a stab to his chest" more interesting than what was given.

But I don't think either way is worth dueling pistols at dawn.

 

[StrangeLife]

I always do my best to avoid over-using "tibialoconcupiscent" and "batrachophagous" but it ain't easy...

 

[electric1]

When possible, say "said." Don't worry that it is repetitious. People skim over the word anyway - and they should. It's usually the least important word in the sentence. Using a different word distracts the reader, as I've discussed elsewhere (Step 8).

 

[Ironiclaconic]

I think SR is right that the argument isn't worth the (metaphoric) heat, so I am content to leave it as is, with Bramble disliking the phrasing.

One way to approach the "said" question is to take a survey of what the masters of English prose actually do. I did this once tallying up dialogue tag techniques in Melville, Twain, Dickens, Faulkner, etc. and guess what? There isn't a consensus. About half use "said" almost exclusively, and the other half use a mix and match approach. A lot of the greats (Dickens and Wharton as I recall) even made heavy use of the "he said X-ly" structure that would get them redlined by a lot of editors who think they know better.

Use whatever works for you.

 

[sr71plt]

General reading (by buyers) change by time and locale. If you aren't writing to sell it doesn't matter much what preferences you prefer. If you do, picking successful authors from another time or locale doesn't necessarily help on what is popular in this market now.

 

[SamScribble]

Personally, I never have a problem with he said, she said, Fred said, Mary said. When you need it, use it; when you don't, don't. In fact, one of my IRL editors frowns on anything other than he said, she said.

 

[RoyceConnors]

I personally solved the problem by getting rid of dialogue descriptors all together. I set up the conversation and use the dialogue itself to denote who's speaking. I found it helps keep the flow going better and the scene plays out better.
I'm getting good results in scoring and reads, so it must work well to some extent, although writing style plays a key part in it working right.

 

[RoyceConnors]

When I think of dialogue and descriptors, I think of the emotion of the speaker.
He opined.
He pondered
He grumbled
He groaned out
He whispered
He yelled, or shouted
He choked out in gasps.....

and so on. Said, is so generic and unemotional. Readers know the person said it, it's how they said it that counts.

 

[SecondCircle]

Moderation I think is the key. Said is okay, just don't use it all the time. More descriptive tags like "whimpered" or "uttered" are great and should be used to show how something was said, like screamed or whispered. One the same token, if I see them after every line of dialogue, I'm gonna puke.

Just change up the scenery, but make sure readers still know where they are at.